Late Night Open Thread: Does Dan Crenshaw Have 30-50 Feral Friends?

So Rep. Crenshaw doubled down, because OF COURSE…

(Gerrymandered district looks like the silhouette of a guy wearing sound-blocking headphones… )

37 replies
  1. 1
    NotMax says:

    Déjà blech.


  2. 2
    mrmoshpotato says:

    Would you loan your car to someone with no license or insurance?

    — Matthew Dowd (@matthewjdowd) September 4, 2019

    Would anyone in their right mind trust Matthew Dowd with political analysis?

  3. 3

    @mrmoshpotato: But when you’ve lost Matt Dowd…

  4. 4
    Yarrow says:

    Pete Davidson with his dumbass comments about Crenshaw on SNL the weekend before the election in 2018 did a lot of harm. It made Crenshaw look sympathetic. The district has been solidly Republican for years, but in 2018 there was a solid challenger. Texas suburban districts around big cities have been moving purple and there were hopes the Dem could win. In the end Crenshaw won by 7 points but I think it could have been closer, and the Dem candidate might have won, had that last minute boost by Pete Davidson not happened.

  5. 5
    Groucho48 says:

    Roberts declares there is no way of telling if that gerrymandering crosses a line. No way at all.

  6. 6
    mrmoshpotato says:


    Pete Davidson with his dumbass comments about Crenshaw on SNL the weekend before the election in 2018 did a lot of harm. It made Crenshaw look sympathetic.


  7. 7
    Mike in DC says:

    I’m trying to think of circumstances, outside of trying someone else’s gun out at a shooting range(while they’re standing nearby), where I would need to “borrow” a gun from them. Coming up empty. Is this an actual fucking thing that happens, or are they just straining to come up with a justification, however lame, for opposing universal background checks? Wait, I just answered my own question. Never mind.

  8. 8
    Ruckus says:

    @Mike in DC:
    By Jove I think you’ve got it!
    Always go with the stupidest answer first, it’s the most likely to be right 98% of the time. Of course you may have trouble coming up with an answer stupid enough because you aren’t as dumb as a lamppost. So you’ll have to work to come up with an answer as stupid as possible, it’s actually quite a bit more work for a normal person to try to be that stupid.

  9. 9
    Kai-two says:

    @Mike in DC:

    It doesn’t seem that unusual to me. When I was a kid just starting hunting, a neighbor loaned me a deer rifle for a month or so. A couple of weeks to sight it in and shoot it then a couple of weeks for hunting. I couldn’t afford to buy my own.

    I’ve loaned shotguns to people many times who wanted to take family or friends to shoot clays. I’ve loaned shotguns to people who wanted to try duck hunting. I borrowed a .454 to take to Alaska as a bear gun on a fishing trip. A friend has my .338 elk gun in his safe because it’s a pain to fly with it so I just leave it there. I’ve borrowed and loaned unusual guns just to take them out and shoot them.

    I don’t get what this whole flap is about but it’s very strange to see people wigged out by the idea of loaning guns.

    And, for what its worth, I’m all for improving firearms control laws.

  10. 10
    Chetan Murthy says:

    @Kai-two: He was writing about loaning handguns, not hunting rifles.

    ETA: And it’s clear he doesn’t think the people to whom he loans those guns, need have licenses themselves.

  11. 11
    kindness says:

    Don’t forget. In Texas it’s OK to redraw Congressional borders any time you want to. So long as you have a majority.

    Karma Republicans. Karma.

  12. 12
    Pablo says:

    Don’t bogart that gun, my friend.

  13. 13
    smike says:

    @Chetan Murthy:

    ETA: And it’s clear he doesn’t think the people to whom he loans those guns, need have licenses themselves.

    I seems (to me) to also imply that the people he is loaning handguns to are unable to pass a background check at all. You know… Patriots!

  14. 14
    Kattails says:

    OK, my current take on this is that the “Well regulated militia” part of the 2nd amendment was put in purposefully as a demand that the militia members recognize an obligation to the government to be overseen and directed by that government. Who the hell else is going to do the regulating? Yet
    the current members actively resist any regulation whatsoever, justifying this in their minds as needing to be able to fight the gummint when it becomes repressive (i.e. wants to take their guns).
    We’re good guys! We don’t need no regulatin’!
    Yet even a cursory read-through of the “Well regulated” Twitter feed (thanks to whoever passed on that link!) shows that too many current members of this so-called militia are, to all intents and purposes, rabble; hot-headed, self-important, mean, careless, and dumb.
    If they refuse to accept the regulation of the government as it may be expressed by the majority of the voters the gov’t represents–that is if they refuse to accept the first part of the amendment, then they can’t just randomly keep the second part. It seems to me that their rights are inherent in their acceptance of the obligation. Otherwise we the people can just throw the damned thing out and come up with something better worded.
    Hope this is sufficiently coherent, it’s bloody late, Ozark will be bletching any minute now.

  15. 15
    hervevillechaizelounge says:

    @Mike in DC:

    I assumed that one-eyed asshole was talking about lending guns in a posse-type situation, like if one of his neighbor’s slaves ran away.

    I’m so fucking paranoid I half believe the SNL situation was purposely created to give him an electoral edge:(

  16. 16
    Patricia Kayden says:

    And this is why we need a Democratic Congress and President. Republicans are going to double down on their love affair with guns. They’ll never come around to supporting gun control, no matter how many of their fellow Americans have to unnecessarily die.

  17. 17
    Amir Khalid says:

    I agree with you 133%. By my reading of the second amendment, the right to own a firearm is pursuant to the duty to serve, if called up, in an ad hoc armed miltia organised and properly regulated by the state. Calling up such a militia is no longer the practice anywhere in the US, so that amendment should be obsoleted.

  18. 18
  19. 19
    Amir Khalid says:

    Which is not ad hoc and not exclusively under state control, being part of the federal military’s reserve component. And, as I understand, whose personnel are issued weapons as needed instead of bringing their own.

  20. 20

    @Amir Khalid: The Guard is under command of the Governor of the state, however they can be federalized in case of national emergency, like to avoid having a draft.

  21. 21
  22. 22
    OzarkHillbilly says:

    @Kattails: Blech.

  23. 23

    @RAVEN: Exactly how was I mistaken?

  24. 24
    My Side of Town says:

    Background check question: Would applicant lend guns to others to avoid background checks? Yes. No.

    If No, proceed to next question. If Yes dispatch agents to confiscate any guns applicant possesses.

  25. 25
    RAVEN says:

    @🐾BillinGlendaleCA: Ah, I see, I read it avoiding the draft. It’s funny, there is a group email lit for the company and they threw a fit about Kapernick. When I went to the reunion last year they had a table covered with articles about how they went to the Supreme Court, had hunger strikes and big letter writing campaign to keep from going. It was OK for THEM to protest!

  26. 26

    @RAVEN: OK, I think we’re on the same page.

  27. 27
    JWR says:

    The first time I heard of Crenshaw was during that SNL bit, but then I saw him on one of the Sunday morning shows and he was taking issue with a few of the other guests for having said that Democracy was under attack, because “hey, I’m a combat vet and so I know what it’s like to be under actual attack so watch your language, you guys!’ or some such nonsense. Good first impression, Danny boy. Lousy second.

    PS. I haven’t commented in quite awhile and didn’t want to loose my rep as a fine and upstanding member of the community. (So there!)

  28. 28
    Professor Bigfoot says:

    Dan Crenshaw is an asshole.

    But then— he’s a Republican, ain’t he?

    I wouldn’t loan my car to someone I didn’t KNOW and TRUST, and I sure as hell wouldn’t loan a gun to someone I didn’t know and trust.

    But that’s “conservatives” for ya.

  29. 29
    SFAW says:


    Always go with the stupidest answer first, it’s the most likely to be right 98% of the time.

    Kind of a variant of Macco’s Razor.

  30. 30
    SFAW says:


    I haven’t commented in quite awhile and didn’t want to loose my rep as a fine and upstanding member of the community.

    That ship already left the station, bucko.

  31. 31
    matt says:

    @Kai-two: What’s weird about it is that Crenshaw said ‘to defend themselves’ not for hunting. Which implies that he’s lending guns solely for the purpose of shooting people.

  32. 32
    RSA says:

    And we don’t make sweeping policy on one situation.

    DHS would beg to disagree.

  33. 33
    VOR says:

    @SFAW: Josh Marshall at Talking Points Memo formulated the principle and John Scalzi named it – Trump’s Razor: The stupidest possible answer consistent with the facts is most likely to be right.

  34. 34
    BretH says:

    The obvious question that needs to be asked of the Good Representative is, would he still lend those weapons if he were personally liable for anything that was done with it? If he had insurance would he be cool with lending a gun to someone for “self-protection” knowing he could be liable anything that then happened?

    Such a simple thing – gun ownership can be a right and also completely regulated. No-one is infringing on your right to own guns, meaning someone couldn’t just look at you and say “you can’t have a gun”. But the actual ownership can and absolutely should be subject to all sorts of legal restrictions.

    And the first step is full liability of gun owners for anything that happens involving that weapon, unless it was reported stolen, in which case the circumstances of the theft need to also be judged – was the weapon properly stored and secured? No? You’re liable.

  35. 35
    BRyan says:

    @matt: Absolutely this. i was visiting friends in florida — not exactly known for lax gun laws — and these folks had 30+ guns, including two “nope, they’re not assault rifles” AR-15s. They were so pleased to be able to accommodate friends visiting from Kansas who had left their guns at home but were afraid to take themselves to Orlando if they weren’t carrying. I can’t imagine living in the constant state of fear that gun nuts without their guns must occupy.

  36. 36
    Richard Guhl says:

    The gun god death cult is fear-based and can’t be reasoned with. It’s adherents believe there’s danger lurking everywhere with nameless others posing murderous threats at any moment. Once you succumb to fear like that, there’s no limit. Is one gun enough?
    The fear only multiplies. And you need the totem to ward off the fear at all times and in all places. But what this really means is that all the arguments of the gun god death cult about freedom or defense against tyranny are made in bad faith.
    Quite often, their so-called freedom is tyranny for the rest of us. Their open displays are intended to frighten and intimidate, and limit our freedom to go about in peace. As for their assertions about defense against tyranny, I find that a big, fat lie.
    For the past few years, we’ve had a President who trashes the Constitution and makes threats against a free press, and what have they done?
    Nothing. In fact, they’re all in with Trump.
    And while they’d vehemently deny it, the gun god death cult demands regular bloodbath sacrifices to justify their own fears.
    We cannot guarantee perfect safety in life. But we don’t have to cater to irrational fears.

  37. 37
    DigitalAmish says:

    48 years ago (almost to the day now that Dan Crenshaw has sparked the memory) one of my buddies lent a gun to my best friend. Two days later I found him in a gravel pit with the gun in his hand and a bullet in his head. So fuck Dan Crenshaw 12 ways to Hell.

Comments are closed.